Reason vs. Faith, Question 2 of 8 - Ayn Rand Institute

[vonGleichenT]

hmm reason ultimately wins the debate

[ChasingCharles]

This looks like a hard time in Yaron's life. He looks slightly hopeless. Seems happy nowadays. :)

[TheAmazingMorse]

How does the Right co-mingle Ayn Rand and Fundamental Christianity so well? I subject this question to you all with the suggestion that the answer is that neither side thinks that much about it. Both are simplistic answers to the complicated question of what it means to be human.

[SuperMegaUberGenius]

A federal court has agreed with 26 states – Obamacare is unconstitutional. In a strongly-worded decision late last week, the three-judge panel said the individual mandate provision in President Obama’s health care law violates the U.S. Constitution. This is the most significant setback yet to this unconstitutional law which we have so strongly opposed. Earlier this year, the House voted to REPEAL OBAMACARE, but the Democratically-controlled United States Senate killed the legislation.

[visvaldisX]

Hard to believe...what better ally can capitalism have other than religion.

[TheIrrefutable]

@jmck53: Congratulations on your ingenious one-two punch. Rejecting someone's arguments based on both her ethnicity and her sexual practices in quick succession wins you the argument, sir. There is no possible way to win against your well-thought-out and reasoned view. You are the greatest rhetorician ever. Either that, or it's impossible to win an argument with someone who exists in a perpetual intellectual seizure. :/

[jmck53]

ayn rand was noting but an atheistic jew slut her views are valueless.

[ramatirthadasa]

@jmck53 your obviously a muslim or maoist

[aaaaaaaars]

'As to what I learned in school' of course his ego would not be able to take the fact that his time in school was wasted he went to school and is very important If the 3rd question is another like this I'm not going to watch it or the other 5

[designtoexpire]

This will not make sense to a theist, because the majority of them base their entire sense of identity and pride upon the exact act of rejecting rational judgment in favor of faith. It is like telling an altruist how selfless they are, many will use it as a means of reinforcing their self justifying notions. A victim requires a victimizer To a rational mind, the despicable nature of the concept is apparent, to them it is precisely the value that they seek to achieve.

[mcdonalds411]

As much as I disliked calculus, I can't deny it is useful

[MrChirpsky]

Philosophy, to be useful, must be a sort of bridge between science and religion separating these unique disciplines while keeping the people in harmony (allowing for one to be on either/or side of the bridge without becoming "the enemy").

[2932AV8]

Please, uhm, stop, uhm, clearing your throat. Uhm. You're doing just fine!

[lucentenor]

hyobel, being extremely reasonable isn't a bad thing. It can be, if you say emotion must only be a matter of faith. Emotions are psychological mechanisms, usefull for judging events in split-second experience.  But they can be erroneous. Through greater understanding of the world (reason) your emotions, or "intuitions" can change. Like a genius mechanic that "feels" the problem with a car by nuances in engine noise. Open your mind, but judge critically.

I wish you well.

[hyobel]

And I thought people of religion are the only ones who can become fundamentalists!

People of Reason also have the same passion (like madmax8903) for their beliefs. Passions which are irrational!

[hyobel]

Reason is like the lawyers. It can twist just about anything. It can incriminate the innocent, acquit the criminal, lessen the grave sin of criminals, and underpin the slight mistake of laypeople.

It is not THE only way to THE truth, but A way to A truth.

[madmax8903]

(Sigh) I'm ending this discussion right now, since it's becoming ridiculous. Anytime someone attempts to debunk reason as you do, it's obvious that one is dealing with an idiot, no matter how much quasi-philosophy they spout. I might as well reply with gibberish, or double-dutch, and then assert I've won the argument, or lost the argument: since reason isn't the ultimate mark or standard, who's to know? People living off the advantages conferred by reason attempting to refute it. Gnyah!

[hyobel]

Hey, hey, hey. It's your problem. You act like you're on the side of reason but your arguments are self-contradictory.

I did not even say I am a theist but you jump to that conclusion already! Remember the rule in philosophy: give a benefit of a doubt until it's proven.

[circa300]

And as for that personification of reason and faith, it is illogical to have yourself ruled blindly by some dictator. Is this not the same for faith? What you're advocating is that one must not question what we are told through reason, but through faith, simply accept it. What if it's wrong? What if it pushes humanity to the brink of collapse? Under what you say, who will rise up to stop it? Oh wait, never mind, you're not supposed to, everyone should just accept and shut their mouths.

[hyobel]

Right. It is illogical to have yourself ruled blindly by some dictator, which is CAPITALISM.

I have far better life to be an atheist than to be unemployed.

[hyobel]

Sorry for my grammar. Re-phrase:

"I would have a far better life if I were an atheist than if I were unemployed."

[circa300]

Hyobel, you obviously don't understand what Ayn Rand was trying to put through to the people. You represent the public's terrible interpretation of her and her ideas. She set up a morality that you must follow the rational whenever possible, while never having to stab others in the back, which contradicts exploiting laborers, and being able to go after what you want because you like to do it. She calls for the individual rights and the freedom of each person, and it's a beautiful thing.

[hyobel]

Indeed. I have not a slightest idea what objectivism is. But do you not notice in the video??? The religious people are moronic.

Ayn Rand Institute chose the least in the religious realm and posed this video for media attraction. It is a propaganda to show that the relgious people are morons.

There are not a sensible perspective of religious people in this posting. This posting is capitalism's propagandising, not Reason's strong disposition.

[hyobel]

Ayn Rand Institute is an atheistic institution, and defends capitalism, saying it is moral to have capitalism.

While it is immoral to have religions, it is moral to have capitalism. In fact, Ayn Rand Institute campaigns for UNREGULATED capitalism.

Let's go then!!! Let us exploit all the resources of the world! Let us exploit all human labourers!

Oooops! I think those are happening now, arent they?

[hyobel]

Reason cannot make you feel:

Reason saw a man crying. Reason coldly says, "He is crying because his parents died."

Faith, on the other hand, cried. He felt what the man felt.

Reason turned to Faith and said, "You are deluded, arent you? None of them are your relatives!" - because he does not understand what Faith or the man feels.

[madmax8903]

But everything begins with thoughts (feelings are the effects), and the conscious mind is at its most efficient when guided by reason. Besides I think Jesus' use of faith is grossly misunderstood by the vast majority of Christians: as a matter of fact if read carefully his message was reason-based. Faith was evidence-based, not a blind emotion in obedience to some edict. That definition was attributed to Paul, esp. in Hebrews, which some scholars now claim was never in the original Bible.

[hyobel]

My point is: Faith's domain is emotions, where Reason cannot dwell.

Music and arts can be full of emotions but Reason cannot rationalise why they make people exalted.

Furthermore, no matter how much I feel for somebody (e.g., God or my children), Reason cannot relay the emotions to you but Faith can.

[madmax8903]

I ought to define terms here: my understanding of reason is that it is based on sensory perception. Reason-based faith, or belief comes from what one has observed, eg. having faith in someone to carry out a task because they've done similar things in the past, orc faith in yourself because of confidence in your abilities. Religious faith (what is being discussed) is based on nothing: some guys wrote some stuff millenia ago and it's been passed down in distorted form to us. In fact, some would...

[madmax8903]

...say that if there's any basis whatsoever for the belief then what the believer experiences isn't true faith at all, since what they really have is "sight" not faith. Now, you say faith is concerned with emotion and reason is not. Why? Emotions are based on what one 's thought in the past: Irrational thoughts lead to out-of-control emotions. GIGO. If your thinking isn't based on reason, you're setting yourself up for a world of pain. Look around you: see the no. of people seeing shrinks etc.

[hyobel]

Thats Kantian empiricism, which I was also saying. It is exactly my argument: "What if it is true that the prophets (as they claim themselves to be) really had experience of a God?"

As a philosopher, you should not discount the experiences of others as you have not experienced them. (e.g., the love I felt from my mother cannot be profoundly felt by an orphan).

They have the empirical knowledge, which cannot be conveyed with mere words. The Bible, although its authenticity...

[hyobel]

cannot be completely verified, has the right for a benefit of a doubt. It should not be slighted as mere sight or mere writings.

"Emotions are based on what one's thought in the past." Not exactly. You see, with music and arts, I can be full of emotions, without thinking of anything (well, speaking as an empiricist, you might not have experienced it.)

[madmax8903]

I'm startled that you should associate any part of my pro-reason argument with the enemy of reason (Kant). Considering the experiences of others is not a prerequisite to arriving at a valid conclusion; if it were, that would be the end of philosophy and the end of human knowledge, since who can say they know all that everybody has experienced? It's going back into the realms of "It's true for you..." Why has the bible the right to a benefit of doubt? For what REASON? And emotions, immediate...

[madmax8903]

...though they may be, are based on past thinking. Eg. many people experienced excruciating boredom on their frst contact with classical music (as young children). Years later, after learning to appreciate the profound value of the same, they find listening to Mozart, Chopin, etc extremely pleasurable. I am one. Point a gun at a baby and he might gurgle and play with his toes happily. Point it at a man and you get a very different response. Ask yourself, why the difference?

[hyobel]

I could still argue with your propositions but I see that you have now set your foot steadily with them, but I think you do not get what I am trying to say.

Just like any other arguments I have had in YouTube, arguments become lofty and superfluous that they fall away from the points of arguments.

Kant, as a philosopher, used reason itself to expose its inabilities or inadequacy. I wouldn't put him as an enemy of reason (being a PHILOSOPHER)....

[hyobel]

But I do not want to get into the details as there are more things I think you are missing. I now rest my case. I wish you the best with your undertakings.

[madmax8903]

Fine. I don't know what you're talking about "lofty" and "superfluous" when I'm addressing the points you yourself have raised. But as always happens when an advocate of faith argues with a rationalist eventually you reach impasse, usu. because the faith side isn't arguing at all; merely putting forward assertions without logical backing. It's my fault really: it's futile to even address somebody who is arguing against reason. Reason's "axiomatic". Kant has to use it to try to destroy it.

[hyobel]

I was withdrawing because a philosopher only has reason to use and nothing much else. They are all about logical thinking. I felt that a person, who defends reason while claiming Kant as an enemy of reason, must be out of his reason.

I have never heard of such. Not even from well-known advocates of reason like Prof. (!) Dawkins and Hitchens.

You sound very much like a fundamentalist, eager to slash somebody's throat if his beliefs are confronted. Eager to defend "by all means necessary."

[norcalrobbie2]

"All" major philosophers were Christian? REALLY?

I don't think so.

[DrakeDun]

Only religion can make grown adults say things that stupid.

[norcalrobbie2]

@DrakeDun

Haha... I completely agree.

"From my studies, from what I learned from school..."

What school was this exactly? Religious people crack me up.

[stephleom]

@norcalrobbie2 Haha " FROM WHAT IVE LEARNED IN SCHOOL" hahahahaha. the only thing I learn in History, Economics, Philosophy, hell.. even in SPANISH CLASS, is that the West/Reason/Capitalism is evil. funny to see how people are indoctrinated

[norcalrobbie2]

Stephleom: I don't remember saying anything about the West or Capitalism. And you learned in school that REASON is evil? Great. On that note, I'm not sending my kids to your school.

[Stipoon]

And when Newton stopped working with his reason on pysics, unreason enters his mind, and we hear all sorts of strange things about alchemy, the pope being anti-christ, and other foolish religious opinions.

[InFromTheVoid]

BTW Henrka...the gospel and salvation ultiamtly has nothing to do with "sin"...the bible claims that you will burn in hell for one reason and one reason only...and that is unbelief. You can be a saint all you want and it won't matter...or you could be a immoral bastard, but as long as you BELIEVE then it will not matter in the end. The REAL moral of the story? Bow to your dictator or be totured!

[MoonMankkkkkk]

Well C.S. Lewis was a theologian and a romanticist author purporting the Christian faith, so that is a bad example.

[richardcadbury]

I love yaron's gesture at 0:51, which seems to say,

"go on, you can have the easy one."

[thtrgremlin]

Great religious leaders recognized the power of rationalism. While individuals thrive for power and the manifestation of their own egos, true evil and corruption comes from individuals passiveness, rejecting rationalism for 'leadership'. This leaves fewer leading many with growing inefficiency as fewer people think. This is why I think the bible is a great irony; a book of reason and morality that people have used as an excuse to stop thinking. To follow Jesus is to be nothing like him.

[henrka]

At the end of the day though, all that matters is that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, he was crucified by man, and was raised by God on the third day. He is alive today and sits at the right thone of the Father.

And every man will die and will be judged by God. Those that rejected Christ will go to hell, and those that accepted Christ will have eternal life.

[WarVideo]

And proof of this is...nothing.

[henrka]

Proof of this is Christ's resurrection. It proves that he is the only begotten son of god. It is a historical fact with many witnesses to prove it, as written in the bible. Not too mention the prophesies of the old testament that christ fulfilled.

[buffduff18]

Once again, ignorant christians call their book a book of facts....if I grabbed a book and alleged they were written by witnesses would you believe it without question?

[lutaninh]

talk is cheap..put jesus on youtube so we can see him...matter fact, tell him to call my phone...lol religion is a mind-control..

[markgg1]

do you honestly think I deserve to go to hell just because I cant find evidence to make me believe?

I dont think this is fair. This would include muslims, jews etc... So not many people will be in heaven

[henrka]

Unbelief and lack of faith are sins that deserve hell.  Faith does not require evidence.

You are right very few people will be in heaven. Jesus said to enter through the narrow gate for broad is the gate that leads to destruction.

[markgg1]

But do you think I deserve eternal suffering because I lack faith?

[markgg1]

ill explain more

Do you think a righteous god who knows the future and made me to not believe in him would than send me for eternal suffering even though he made me to fail his test.

Do you think this is fair?

Please dont answer by saying its not your say, I want YOUR opinion please.

Its important you answer. Do YOU think I deserve hell... yes or no?

[henrka]

We are all sinners and deserve hell. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God writes the apostle Paul in Romans. Christ paid the penalty for sin, he atoned for the sin of all of mankind. If a man fails to repent of his sin and turn to Christ accepting the free gift of salvation, he deserves the right penalty for sin which is eternal death in hell.

[markgg1]

So are you going to hell than?

[henrka]

I'm going to heaven because Jesus Christ died for my sins and paid the penalty for sin that I could not pay. Anybody that believe that repents of his sin and believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died on the cross for his sins and was raised on third day has his sins forgiven. I have Jesus Christ as my advocate with the Father, and I will have eternal life because of it.

[markgg1]

that doesnt seem very fair.

What about the 5 billion non christians? Will they all go to hell aswell with me?

I thought god loved us?

[henrka]

God loves us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us. Christ died for sinners so that they can go to heaven. This is the love of God. No man would give his life for an unrighteous man ( a sinner ) but Jesus did just that.

John 3:16 also shows the love of God by saying that "God so much love the world that he gave us his only begotten son that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but will have everlasting life. This is the love of God.

Continues in my next post.

[henrka]

Also although God loves us, he also has to be a just God. He has to punish sin. Sin is the transgression of the law, and the wages of sin is death says the bible.

[markgg1]

So a just god would send me for ETERNAL suffering because although I live a good moral life, i give a lot to charity, i volunteer for a disability charity, my dream is to work in the medical field to alleviate suffering, I just didnt believe in god because i saw no evidence for it. This god apparently made me, knowing the future so set up a system he knew I would fail, and so I get the worst possible pain and suffering for me using my reason to not believe.

Do you think this is Just?

[henrka]

You believe you live a good moral life, I'm telling you that you are a sinner in God's eye and you do not live a good moral life in the eyes of the Lord. No man is good but Jesus Christ.

Have you ever told a lie? then you are a liar and will die in the lake of fire says the bible.

Have you ever looked at a woman with a lustful eye? then you are an adulterer and will not inherit the kingdom of god

Have you ever coveted? you've violated the 10th commandment and deserve hell.

[markgg1]

Well Im telling you that I do live a moral life.. I admit i could do more, but I definately dont do wrong.

I look at women with lustful eyes about ten times a day, just like most single men of my age... God apparently desinged this brain of mine, including my instincts.. (which include ancying women)

I dont even know what coveted means?

And Ill ask you again.. have you worked on the sabbath? have you mixed materials? than u will be burning alongside me.. god is a bit strict isnt he?

[henrka]

By your own admission you are full of lust and are a breaker of God's law.

You are right that God is strict. God is perfect and so is his Law. No human being can keep it. Nobody is accepted by God on the basis of good works or living a moral life. This is why God had to send his Son Jesus to die on the cross for the sins of mankind. If mankind could please God by its actions God would not have sent Jesus Christ to save the world from its sin.

[markgg1]

Ok, well I dont recall a word in the bible talking about lust... but ok.

You live your life in perpetual fear of gods wrath, and Ill enjoy mine thanks on the belief there is no god. Bring me evidence and ill change my mind, until than I think you should not preach to people this evil... its quite immoral. If you teach this to children, than frankly that is child abuse.

[ShatteredPuzzle]

Why are you so eager to label your own existence to be evil? At least offer some sort of evidence to back up your claims, Henrka. None of this "God says so" business.

[henrka]

It's easy for me to see my own sinfulness, because I have repented of my sin. I have acknowledged it before God, that I fall short of God's glory and my only hope lies in Jesus Christ's perfect obedience and atonement for my sin. Unless you repent of your sin you will never see in your eyes your own sin. Pray God that he will grant you repentance and forgiveness of sin, without which you will go to hell.

[ShatteredPuzzle]

Hon, can you please pay attention to what you are saying? God... the magical, supernatural entity... Jesus, the Jewish cosmic zombie... I have to say, I admire the creativity... But to actually believe in this stuff - Think logically. None of it is possible or remotely rational. Do you believe in Santa Claus? In fairies? What makes them any different? Religious people live in a deluded bubble... You can look at other faiths and see they are rubbish. You can remark how silly their beliefs are.

[henrka]

The gospel of Jesus christ is foolishness to those that are perishing (like yourself) but it's the power of god unto salvation for those that believe.

I just quoted you from 1 Corinthians, chapter 1. So I agree with you to the unbeliever, christians look crazy to believe the nonsense of the resurrection. All you can do is to ask God to remove your unbelief and open your eyes to the truth.

[InFromTheVoid]

The passage you quoted from Corinthians is written in apologetics to keep you from detering from the claims. lol And it works. Serioulsy...how hard would it be to predict that you would be persecuted for spreading such nonsense as truth? but since you believe that you should "lean not unto thine own understanding" I am not surprised you are so easliy intimidated. But don't expect others to be so readily gullible because they are threatened.

[ShatteredPuzzle]

Take Scientology, because everyone feels the need to poke fun at that particular religion. They have all kinds of wacky beliefs, and you see that (hopefully)! But Scientologists are completely convinced that they are right. That what they believe is real. They live in a BUBBLE, as I said before. Everyone inside this bubble has broken away from reality. The same goes for Christianity.

[henrka]

Christianity is based on historical facts.  God created the world, Adam disobeyed God and as a result death entered the world, the flood at the time of Noah literally existed, Jesus Christ was born of the virgin Mary, crucified for our sins, and rose again for the salvation of man.

The other big difference with other religions is that Christianity is all about God, not about man. Even salvation is a free gift from God.

[InFromTheVoid]

Name me one bit of historical fact that backs up the claim that a population of zombies came up out of their graves and walked around Jerusalem and were seen by many. Matthew 27:51-53.

Wonder what happened to these folks? Maybe I could talk with one of them.

[ShatteredPuzzle]

You may be entirely certain your God is real, but all of us looking in from the outside are taken by the complete nonsense your faith preaches Just, think about it for a bit. What does Christianity teach? Now use your mind, because I know you arent dumb. I am sure you are capable of intelligent thought Think about Christianity from a scientific perspective and be honest: How could it be real?

[hapspir]

"By your own admission you are full of lust and are a breaker of God's law."

I didn't vote for God. Does that mean that I am exempt from his law?

[henrka]

You are not exempt of God's law. The book of Romans teaches that the wages of sin is death. It also says that sin and death reigned from Adam to Moses, before the Law came in. Sin is a transgression of the Law, but it existed before the 10 commandments were given to Moses. God's law is written in every man's heart teaches the apostle Paul. And every man sins by breaking God's law, you are not exempt of God's Law.

[hapspir]

"You are not exempt of God's law."

Isn't God that dude who lives at the top of a black tower and looks like a giant fiery eyeball? I'm not afraid of Him. He can't possibly see everywhere at once. Therefore, I will "sin" as much as I want and concern myself with my own personal morality. If God happens to see me do something He doesn't like and sends His black riders out to get me, then I'll change my name and move to another state.

[markgg1]

oh man... im so glad my mind is not filled with this rubbish.

I feel so privaleged!

If gods gonna punish me for the odd one night stand, and enjoying a beer, than hes just jeolous..

God doesnt exist, so nothing to worry about thankfully.

Free yourself from this psychological tyranny. God only exists inside that cranium of yours, and nowhere else

[markgg1]

You tell your god when you see him (which you wont cause he doesnt exist) to go to hell (pardon the pun)

[henrka]

You are now committing blasphemy and denyng the existence of the Lord further violating God's commandment. If you don't repent of your sin you will perish.

[markgg1]

Im predicting your answer, so I will just carry on

If this were true (and thankfully it probably isnt) than god is the most evil being I have ever heard from fiction.

If true, god does not deserve respect from me

And if god did exist, im certain that someone of his awesome power and scientific intelelect who designed atoms, the laws of physics, chemistry, made the universe... would not be so petty as to punish evolved apes on a tiny rock in a corner of the galaxy for nt believing

[markgg1]

cumon man.... come out of your ignorance and see the beautiful truth as it really is. There is no god, when you die your life is finished and you disolve into elements that join nature part of the carbon and nitrogen cycle

So you have one life, and I suggest you make the damn most of it and stop belittling your own intelligence and the rest of us with these crazy cult bronze age myths perpetrated by the roman empire 2000 years ago as a forof population contro.

Free your mind!

[henrka]

Just replied, to your last post. See above my comment.

[henrka]

Isaac Newton used reason when he studied nature as this video says. That said he was clear that he saw a creator, that all the mathematical laws are universal equilibrium had to be the the product of a superior being, that is God, who created the Universe.

[Daemonocracy]

God also granted us free will, we still have a choice to follow him or not. The essence of religion is Free will. again, Faith and Reason are not complete opposites. They can coexist.

[LegalizeCapitalism]

But in your view reason is not mans primary means and is not as efficient as faith when it comes down to the basic morality, what he does and for whose interest. Any compromise of reason is a concession to its antithesis.

[manhglit123]

Morality is an invention - it's part of the Mammalian (brain make-up).. if we didn't have the primitive (reptile) "brain" or Logic/Reason (neo-cortex) then we'd lay around 'loving' one another -- OK.. trying to Reason that Morality is 'divinely' inspired is lost in translation..

[Daemonocracy]

and since when is "applying your mind" as the second speaker says, some how separated from faith? has he not heard of the Protestant work ethic?

I admire Ayn Rand's Objectivism but these speakers seem to parrot her original arguments instead of having a true understand of Rand. Rand was around during the Bolshevik uprising and saw the ravages of Comunism (atheist) on her birthland. She obviously could not see how God could exist and allow such treachery. She did not understand God.

[manhglit123]

1) "Meditation" is not "focused thought," and Yaron Brook was obviously not using it in that sense. - Meditation is focused thought = Meditate on a particular issue or whatnot (think about) versus (silent non-thinking - meditation or trace state processes - this not what i meant)..

[mikem1234]

The people who thought this were totally ignorant of what could be known through reason, eg. that it isn't "God's will" that I am born in to poverty (if I was). You cannot explain that with reference to God if there are real logical reasons for it. but I think even if you DO find out how everything works, which is hard enough on its own, it still doesn't rule out a supreme being. I think the problem is that we always assume that this being need by omnipotent, that this being "cares" about us.

[Daemonocracy]

Rand was never able to rule out a supreme being and in fact never tried. She just couldn't work him into her philosophy so ignored him all together. To me, learning about the facts around you, is learning about Gods creation. Learning Calculus is learning the universal language of God, his formula for how his creation works. Simply stating that Newton had a secular moment while he was researching is laughable and a far from "reasonable" explanation as to how a Christian can use reason.

[mikem1234]

I agree with everything you say.

[mikem1234]

What is unforgiveable is when people use their faith to support what should be supported by reason, ie. why does the world turn: it is obvious there are mechanisms in place doing this which can be measured, but who's to say that those very mechanisms aren't due to some original, logically unfolding creation. I actually take the same point as the deist scientific philosophers. There is a creator, but we don't have this puppet-master controlling everything we do.

[InFromTheVoid]

This is the story I always bring up with believer when they bring up morality and the bible.

[aj1141]

"MONEY MAKES MONEY?

good sir is this a serious idea you suscribe to?

Man makes money.

"what he meant was this... evil feeds off of evil? does it really??? NO! it feeds of of people who posses evil... EVIL does not exist on a "stand-alone-basis" its figurative.... c'mon.

[manhglit123]

God believers - shun Reason; because they cannot reason (or they are extremely limited). Reasoning is learned, just as mathematics and so on. "There are smart believers;" means nothing, explaining to 'other believers' why science or reason is applicable to a God belief is pointless (just hustling sheep). Reality maybe an illusion, but don't forget the illusion is real.

[manhglit123]

Actually, you do get science and calculus from meditation - focused thought (irrational thinkers don't meditate). Furthermore, 'faith' is not the opposite of reason; one places faith (trust) in reason - just as one places faith in spirituality (or God). Reason or 'facts found in reality' are merely subjective truths - (although a form of righteousness concerning application).

[rbilkie]

You're defining by non-essentials. 1) "Meditation" is not "focused thought," and Yaron Brook was obviously not using it in that sense. What distinguishes "reasoning," a cognitive process, and "meditation," a supposed cognitive process, is that "meditation" relies on spiritual, non-sensory revelation. 2) Same principle: "Faith" is not synonymous with "trust" or "reliance." What distinguishes "faith" from "trust," is that "faith" is "reliance without any evidence"--hence the opposite of reason.

[mikem1234]

Not a Christian, by the way, but....not all major Christian pholilosophers believed that faith had to replace reason, or "toss it aside." For example, advocates of faith in God such as Blasie Pascal didn't say that all reason discovered was useless because it didn't involve faith and scripture. Many said (the intelligent Christians) that believing doesn't disprove reason, but that it is not enough to reason. Likewise, reason can't prove or disprove God. Reason and faith = different planes.

[rbilkie]

Mikem1234--The scholastics separated philosophy from theology. Thanks to Aquinas's reintroduction of Aristotle, reason could be used for this earth, for material reality, but faith had to be used for the transcendent realm. The result is that faith was driven out of the sciences, but not the humanities. Thus Newton believed in God, but kept him out of his rational world of science. People have tried to drive it out of the humanities. Rand did just that, successfully. She demonstrated that...

[rbilkie]

...reason and faith are incompatible, and that a rational morality is demonstrable by reason and incompatible with faith. Reason and faith can't both be correct because contradictions don't exist. Reason is the reliance on sensory evidence and logic. Faith is the reliance on one's feelings or wishes. Faith is "belief without evidence," or "belief without reason." How more opposite can you get?

[mikem1234]

I'm reffering to the Christians scientists, really. If reason and faith were incompatible, we would expect that nothing could be done in the sciences properly. If I have faith in the infinite, but definite knowledge of the finite (math etc), then reason and faith aren't incompatible in that sense. If I'm figuring out how everything works on Earth, it doesn't mean I can't have faith that all this descended from some source. I don't have to disprove what is discovered by reason to have faith.

[45a66]

and see where it goes. They want no rules, as I understand, they think capitalism can solve the thing without rules. Think they mean because of reason and there could be good reason. Then we would have to have everything out in the open and belive in each others analyses, cause noone would have any interest in lies, well,yes.Then there should be no problem in who's whatching who.

I dont subscribe

[45a66]

what I mean is, money makes money, it does'nt care, it goes where it can make more, that's why we got to have politics, rules, worldwide, no offshore.Looks like the human race destroy itself, this is my worry.U can't trust in the market, the outlook is very bad and u don't need gold in the desert, u need water.

[45a66]

capitalism is money and money don't solve anything, peoble does. money makes money.Capitalism in it's full is like poker, only one wins.Ok, u would like the arabs to buy ur autoindustry?(they could buy the steel also,well the whole country)No reason?Sure the congress should'nt help, cause in capitalism this would't happen.Have u read these peoble's thinking about environment?maybe u see when half the country is without work.revolution?stoneage.

[45a66]

reason is ok, but their capitalism ideas I think are without responberbillity and could lead to anarcy.

[PureAdrenaline97]

Reason wins ..seriously people we need to all wake up and get rid of mystical higher autorities that control us such as government which manipulates us and our 10 amendments..We support bogus lives of politicians that don't create any value to society in which we benefit...We make the leaders rich of the country because people believe in faith and god. LETS GET 1 THING CLEAR GOD = HONESTY /// SATAN = DISHONESTY

[jetta230]

one thing is clear. one of us is right in the end.

[meachanDEE]

C.S. Lewis was excellent at rhetoric, arguing by analogy and emotional manipulation, but he was a piss-poor philosopher. The moral law argument has been disproven. That xian guy just showed his own ignorance.

[forest51690]

i disagree with the last point.

[soitoldhimno]

Well said Dr. Brook. Newton didn't figure out F=ma from a divine revelation.

[boldstandard]

I'm glad Dr. Ghate used the Abraham/Isaac story as an example. His interpretation is a good summary of Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling, except Kierkegaard was trying to argue for faith--but reading that book was my first step towards atheism, when I was in high school. Happily, I choose reason!

[Mrmikeshelton]

Yeah, I agree. It's the perfect example. When people hear that story in Sunday School, they have no problem with it, but when they read of someone like Andrea Yates, they condemn her and yet never see the irony.

[sumfamousperson17]

Dang, good answer!

[rbilkie]

Excellent answer

[Berenad]

Yea..I'm still confused as to when Newton and C.S. Lewis became philosophers =P

[Radeo]

Dr. Brook never said they were.

He was giving an example of a "religious" person's achievement. He did so in response to the allegation that if religion was truly anit-life, those men could not have contributed what they did.

He is clarifying that though Newton and Lewis were of mixed premises, whatever good they did contribute came through their exercise of reason, and not their faith in God.

[Berenad]

Oh, I certainly wasn't asserting that Dr. Brook said they were, only that the questioner cited them as philosophers.

[Radeo]

Ah, okay. My bad. ^^

[soitoldhimno]

Everyone's a philosopher.

[forest51690]

I'm a philosopher

[teewillis1981]

Everyone is not a philosopher.

A philosopher is a person who regulates his or her life, actions, judgments, utterances, etc., by the light of philosophy or reason.

Most people do not and are not capable of doing this.

[shovelcharge]

...ya not all the major philosopher were Christians...Karl Marx, Hegel, Sartre, Aristotle, Plato...no?

[teewillis1981]

Nietzsche and Schopenhauer

[ArrogantEgoist]

Great analysis by Dr. Ghate.

[JackDoitCrawford]

Very good distinction made here.